View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Heidelberger Dokumentenserver 1 [running title: Esperanto and Chinese anarchism 1907-1920] Esperanto and Chinese anarchism 1907-1920: The translation from diaspora to homeland Gotelind Müller University of Heidelberg Gregor Benton Cardiff University The history of Esperanto in China was for long periods closely linked with anarchism. This article surveys the connection in the years up to 1920, and sets out to show which groups used which arguments to agitate for Esperanto, in order to throw light on the complexity of the relationship between language and politics in China, especially in the first half of the twentieth century. keywords: Esperanto, anarchism, China, language politics, language reform The history of Esperanto in early twentieth century China has been strongly – though not exclusively – linked with anarchism.1 This article looks at the origins and early phases of China’s Esperanto movement in Tokyo and Paris and at its groups of supporters and critics and their arguments for or against Esperanto, to support the claim of a strong connection between Esperanto and anarchism in China (and incidentally in all of East Asia). This relationship was less developed in, though not altogether absent from, the West, where anarchists generally showed less interest in language issues than their East Asian counterparts. This contrast points up important differences in cultural sensibilities. It must also be seen in the context of the historical setting in which anarchism was introduced to China: who developed an interest in it and why. We start by briefly summarising some basic facts about Esperanto as a language and a political movement. Esperanto is a planned universalist language developed in the late nineteenth century by L. L. Zamenhof, a Jewish oculist, for use as a global second language. Zamenhof grew up in Poland under Russian occupation and experienced at first hand the linguistic, ethnic, national, and religious tensions among Jews, catholic Poles, orthodox Russians, and protestant Germans. He identified problems of communication as a main cause of conflict and constructed Esperanto as the remedy. He presented his work to the public in 1887. As a doctor, he wrote it under the pseudonym Doktoro Esperanto – the Hoping One. Subsequently, this name was transferred to the language.2 2 Zamenhof set out the structure of Esperanto in his Fundamento de Esperanto, published in 1905. It strove towards maximum simplicity. The grammar consisted of just sixteen rules, the spelling was “phonetic,” nouns were genderless, and verbs were regular and uninflected. The vocabulary was based primarily on Latin, English, German, French, and Russian.3 Zamenhof tested and developed the new language by translating works ranging from the Old Testament to plays by Shakespeare, Molière, and Goethe. In the late nineteenth century, the Esperanto movement started to take off. Today, the Universala Esperanto-Asocio, founded in 1908, has members in over 110 countries and represents more than 100,000 Esperanto speakers, who send delegates each year to the World Esperanto Congress. More than one hundred periodicals appear in the language and more than 30,000 books have been published in it. As it grew in influence and extent, the Esperanto movement was increasingly racked by internal conflict. Zamenhof himself tried to inject the idea of Esperanto with a quasi-religious meaning. Others saw the language as a neutral tool of communication. Officially, Esperantists set aside their differences and agreed on a vague general platform of understanding between peoples and world peace, but tensions in the movement continued 4 Socialists and anarchists saw Esperanto as a perfect vehicle for internationalism and world revolution. It also won strong support among internationally minded Chinese. Esperanto was imported into China by foreigners and initially had little impact. However, leading Chinese radicals outside China – primarily anarchists in France and Japan – passionately embraced the Esperanto cause and did their best to establish it in China and the diaspora. In later years, Esperanto also won a following among Chinese communists. After the October Revolution, in the 1920s, networks of Esperantists in the Soviet Union set up a workers’ press.5 In 1921, at its inaugural meeting, a communist- supported but supra-party International Association of Non-Nationals (SAT: Sennacieca Asocio Tutmonda) emphasised the use of Esperanto in class struggle and condemned the mainstream Universala Esperanto-Asocio as politically neutral. In 1931, the International of Proletarian Esperantists (IPE) was founded with the goal of sidelining SAT and supporting only the Comintern line. The IPE established its main support outside the Soviet Union in Germany, but it also had a flourishing branch in China.6 The Soviet experiment in Esperanto ended in tragedy in 1937, when its supporters were purged during Stalinist Russification, but it later revived.7 The Tokyo group of Chinese anarchists Chinese anarchists in Tokyo and Paris began publishing journals, independently of one another, in the spring of 1907. The Tokyo group originated in the Society for the Study of Socialism (Shehuizhuyi jiangxihui), which Liu Shipei led. Liu’s Tokyo journal was called Tianyi (Natural justice). It was followed later by Hengbao (Equality), which had a somewhat different outlook. Together with his wife He Zhen, Liu called for social revolution incorporating feminism. Unlike the Paris group, which assumed that the universals of Western thinking were also valid for China, Liu and He were strongly attached to Chinese culture and believed that anarchist principles grew out of a Chinese cultural “essence” that would facilitate China’s transition to an anarchist future (Krebs 1998:29-31). The Tokyo Chinese anarchists believed it was necessary to express oneself as simply as possible to reach the widest number of people and supported the call for an 3 international means of communication. Delegates at both the two big world congresses of radicalism in 1907, that of the Second International in Stuttgart and of the anarchists in Amsterdam, raised the question of Esperanto, but while the former did not consider the problem urgent, the latter responded with greater enthusiasm (Nomad 1966:86). In Japan, the Japanese anarchist Ōsugi Sakae had learned Esperanto and was keen to pass on his knowledge, including to the Chinese anarchist Jing Meijiu, an occasional contributor to Tianyi. Esperanto made its first appearance in Tianyi – without comment or translation – in the title of a picture of the French anarchist Elisée Reclus.8 Tianyi nos. 16-19 published a picture of Zamenhof, the Esperanto anthem by Zamenhof, and an article by Liu Shipei on Esperanto.9 In the article, Liu argued that only an artificial language could be truly international and that a worldwide union would come about only if all goods were owned in common and there was a world language.10 Liu, whose knowledge of foreign languages probably did not extend beyond a smattering of Japanese, found Esperanto fascinating. Would it not solve the problem of communication in China, with its host of mutually incomprehensible dialects? According to Liu, Esperanto had much in common with Chinese and would therefore be easy to learn. (He had used the same argument for anarchism, to “prove” that it would not lead to cultural alienation; on the contrary, China would provide its worldwide vanguard.) Liu reckoned Esperanto could be learned in three months and if everyone agreed to adopt it, the revolutionary literature of the whole world would become available to people everywhere. For Liu, Esperanto would be the sole foreign language. He accepted that it would be hard to abolish Chinese and he may never have intended to do so, given his attachment to Chinese tradition.11 In 1908, in an article for the magazine Guocui xuebao (National essence), he stressed that Chinese should be preserved as a unique cultural monument, for, being “archaic,” it could provide information about the evolution of human society. Instead of following the Japanese model of romanisation, the ancient Chinese dictionary Shuowen jiezi should be translated into Esperanto with guides to pronunciation, to make Chinese accessible to the entire world.12 In 1908, the Japanese authorities closed down Tianyi after it published a translation of the Communist Manifesto. It was succeeded by Hengbao, which was dedicated to “anarcho-communism, anti-militarism, the general strike, reports about the people’s suffering, and links with the international revolutionary labour unions.” Hengbao frequently contained material in English and Esperanto and recruited participants for Ōsugi Sakae’s Esperanto courses. Its Esperanto section explained that Chinese anarchists in Japan suffered as a result of the language problem, for like most foreign revolutionaries in Japan they knew only their own language, and translating cost time and effort. Ōsugi, the driving force behind this Chinese campaign, promised that Esperanto could be learned in six months to a year.13 The Paris group of Chinese anarchists The Paris group of Chinese anarchists was led by Wu Zhihui, Li Shizeng, Zhang Jingjiang, and Chu Minyi, who had been recruited by French anarchists. In 1907, they launched the journal Xin shiji (New century). They believed in a world citizenship that would transcend conventional state and cultural frontiers and in the need for a world language. Esperanto was in vogue in Europe at the time, especially in the internationalist circles the Chinese anarchists frequented, and Paris was its stronghold. Xin shiji started life with an Esperanto subtitle, La Novaj Tempoj (new times). Its 4 publishers saw Esperanto as a practical medium, simply constructed and easy to learn, and as a way of subverting the linguistic hierarchies of natural speech and of promoting internationalism. Espousing Esperantism brought the Xin shiji group into contact with an even wider range of radical opinion.14 Esperanto particularly attracted Chinese in Europe, where they came up daily against a variety of languages.